From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1425091AbWLHHj7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 02:39:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1425092AbWLHHj7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 02:39:59 -0500 Received: from sp604002mt.neufgp.fr ([84.96.92.61]:51826 "EHLO sMtp.neuf.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1425091AbWLHHj6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 02:39:58 -0500 Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 08:40:03 +0100 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: vmlist_lock locking In-reply-to: To: kernel list Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-id: <457916D3.7060008@cosmosbay.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT References: User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org kernel list a écrit : > My understanding is that get_vm_area_node etc. can't be called in > interrupt context because vmlist_lock is obtained with read_lock / > write_lock. I am wondering if it makes sense to use read_lock_bh / > write_lock_bh so that get_vm_area_node can be called in soft interrupt > context. All the code executed when holding vmlist_lock is walking > through the list, so it shouldn't change the behavior. If it does make > sense, BUG_ON(in_interrupt()) can be changed to BUG_ON(in_irq()). Maybe it is just me, but I like to know people names. Or maybe your name really is kernel list ? I wonder why a soft irq would want to lookup vm areas. (since vmalloc() from soft irq is *really* forbiden) Eric